[Ace.mu.nu.] If you enjoy the spectacle of OPEC begging US oil producers to choke back the flow of oil to bail their asses out, then, as Instapundit says, you should hug a fracker.
Sexton goofs on OPEC's plea, reported by CNN Money:
The report said that balancing the market would "require the collective efforts of all oil producers" and should be done "not only for the benefit of the individual countries, but also for the general prosperity of the world economy."
OPEC said that one producer in particular is to blame: The U.S., where shale producers have continued to ramp up their drilling despite lower crude prices.
The increased production has undermined OPEC’s efforts to keep prices between $50 and $60 per barrel.
Faces in want of a fist and mouths in want of My Dick.
This is very wonderful news. That these bastards, who have long enjoyed extracting money from us by artificially restricting supply, and have used the Oil Weapon against us again and again, and have used their oil wealth to prop up communist regimes (see Venezeula) or fund terrorist groups (see most of the Gulf states) or to both prop up a communist regime and fund terrorist groups (see Russia) are now begging us to help them do these things by making ourselves poorer is... well it's just about the most beautiful thing I've read in a year.
And who is again who is anti-fracking? And who is pro-fracking?
And which side does Russia propagandize for? Right, they pay money to anti-fracking propaganda groups in order to get us to stop making so much oil.
And the left supports that, and Trump opposes that (and supports fracking).
Who's the communist agent of influence again?
Dick Status: Plump and Bouncy. And not in a menacing, vulgar way, but in a happy, joyous way, like the Jamboree Bears at Disneyland dancing around and playing the banjo.
#2
We could always join OPEC. Partake of the fine dining, attend the meetings, pontificate, and then tell them we do not choose to control the individual producers.
Posted by: Bobby ||
05/12/2017 12:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
From the CNN Money article:
The cartel has in the past fought fiercely for its market share. Starting in 2014, it pumped relentlessly in order to squeeze higher cost American producers.
The strategy pushed prices well below $30 per barrel and forced many U.S. producers to scale back in 2015 and 2016.
But it had a disastrous effect on the government budgets of OPEC members, forcing them to implement austerity measures.
It also forced U.S. producers to become more efficient, and they can now withstand much lower prices than just a few years ago. Analysts at UBS estimate that U.S. producers can now make money as long as prices remain above $40 per barrel, down from $65 in early 2014.
An unexpected consequence!
Posted by: Bobby ||
05/12/2017 13:03 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Offer to raise our price 1$ a barrel for every thousand foreign mosques they close and 100,000 Paleos they resettle in their own country.
#5
So, we make $ at spot prices above $40 and OPEC needs them to be between $50 and $60. I'd say it's the camel jockeys who are now over a barrel, so to speak.
#8
I'll know that these people are going through real financial stress when they zero out the foreign mosque and madrasa construction budget, and stipends for foreign imams.
#10
OPEC must have mistaken Americans for a country who gives a $hit about their whining. They gouged us for years and held us over a barrel. The royal family got rich, we got poorer, and they were complicit in 911.
#15
Fuck them. No really--fuck them. We should take every single measure we can to increase production and drive the price even lower. Without oil, all pretenses drop--they are left with nothing but sand, as they had no honor to begin with.
[De Klerk Foundation] In this article, it is (again) suggested that the country needs a proper and credible land audit before we carry on with a debate that would otherwise remain emotional and divisive. It is, secondly, highlighted that some research has shown that we may have progressed further with land reform than we are sometimes led to believe. And it is thirdly pointed out that the real "land hunger" is not necessarily for agricultural land to farm, but for urban and peri-urban land to build houses and make a home.
Land reform, especially of agricultural land, is nowadays almost a shibboleth for South African politics. The reasoning of the associated rhetoric usually has the following elements:
"Soil is prosperity, and if you first possess land, you can buy all the other good things with that wealth." And this usually refers to agricultural land.
"Historically, white people stole the land from black people and it has to be returned."
"23 years post-democracy, black people still only own 9.8% of the arable land in South Africa."
"There is a hunger for agricultural land among our people, like in Zimbabwe, and if we do not listen, we will follow the path of land occupation and confiscation."
Underscoring these arguments is that nothing - or very little - has been happening since 1994 and that radical action is needed to return (agricultural) land to black South Africans, such as to expropriate land without compensation. What is the reality? The table below shows the surface area of South Africa, as well as the percentage of agricultural and arable land. It also shows that almost 50% of South Africa is considered desert (less than 200mm rain per year) or very dry (less than 400mm per year).
#1
"There is a hunger for agricultural land among our people, like in Zimbabwe, and if we do not listen, we will follow the path of land occupation and confiscation."
Lose your land to the squatters or the gov't. You decide.
De Klerk's threat reminds us [as he so often has] of the fundamental beliefs and tenants of the 'Deep State' and communism.
#4
Underscoringthese arguments is that nothing - or very little - has been happening since 1994 and that radical action is needed to return (agricultural) land to black South Africans, such as to expropriate land without compensation.
Go for it. It never works.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
05/12/2017 19:17 Comments ||
Top||
[Breitbart] On Thursday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s "Tucker Carlson Tonight," columnist Charles Krauthammer argued that while FBI Director James Comey’s firing is "troubling in some ways," it "has sort of sent people over the edge. To the point where they think there really are no journalistic limits or journalistic restraints...that ought to be observed."
Only 'Troubling' in that POTUS didn't have Comey charged with obstruction of justice. Obviously 'The Hammer' is still suffering from lingering TDS.
#2
There's this new thing all the kids are doing called 'Chain of Command'. The idea that Comey or anybody else at the bureau is irreplaceable is something out of the 4th grade. Did any of the nobility ask themselves what might have happened or the difference been had he fallen in the shower or been in a car accident? How about he simply woke up one day and said, 'the Hell with it'. Would the planet still be spinning off it's axis into the void.
Of course on a more positive note, all the outcry is how we can hope the adults stay in charge, that and some additional outreach from Lena Dunham.
[Hot Air] There’s some additional bad news out there for the "party of science" (as the Democrats have taken to calling themselves) and particularly for transgender advocates. But even if you have no interest in such social justice topics, a new study published by geneticists in Israel is still pretty fascinating.
The Liberty Council has a report this week on new research material coming from Israel’s Weizmann Institute of Science, where scientists have undertaken an exhaustive study of genetic differences between the two genders which go far beyond just what’s found in their 23rd chromosomal pair or what sorts of genitalia they display externally. And some of this research could have far reaching implications in terms of fighting diseases and solving other medical mysteries on top of sorting out this "gender vs sex" question which liberals keep trying to push.
A recent study released from Israel’s Weizmann Institute of Science refutes propaganda from LGBT activists who detach gender completely from sex and promote that men can become so-called "women" by merely "identifying" as female, and vice-versa.
Professor Shmuel Pietrokovski and Dr. Moran Gershoni, both researchers from the Weizmann Institute’s Molecular Genetics Department, "looked closely at around 20,000 protein-coding genes, sorting them by sex and searching for differences in expression in each tissue. They eventually identified around 6,500 genes with activity that was biased toward one sex or the other in at least one tissue, adding to the already major biological differences between men and women."
You can access the study here in .pdf form and browse through it. They discovered all manner of fascinating things, some of which seem obvious in retrospect while others are quite surprising. They identified specific genes which are directly associated with hair growth in skin cells. These genes are far more widespread in men than women, showing up in different places. (The result of that should be obvious.) One of the more surprising developments (at least to me) came in the area of mammary glands. Both males and females have all of the "equipment" to support lactation, but it’s almost never seen in men. The study identified specific genes in men which apparently turn off that process since it’s not needed. Some others would be easier to predict, such as higher levels of muscle building genes in men as opposed to higher levels of genes which are related to fat storage in women. The list goes on.
[AmericanThinker] One has to almost like punishment to face the White House Press Corps these days. Ever since President Trump was inaugurated, this 100% liberal Democrat murder of crows sits there each day and harasses Sean Spicer, or, as in the last few days, Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Spicer has toughened up since his early days, but Sanders, who is temporarily replacing him as he serves his Naval Reserve duty, is a born natural. Like her father, former governor Mike Huckabee, she has the gift of strong, plain language, and she is quick on the draw. How anyone endures the tedium of this press corps is a mystery, but she seems to revel at the opportunity to push back.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Ace.mu.nu.] If you enjoy the spectacle of OPEC begging US oil producers to choke back the flow of oil to bail their asses out, then, as Instapundit says, you should hug a fracker.
[Hot Air] There’s some additional bad news out there for the "party of science" (as the Democrats have taken to calling themselves) and particularly for transgender advocates. But even if you have no interest in such social justice topics, a new study published by geneticists in Israel is still pretty fascinating. 
